Requirements
- Target platform
- OpenClaw
- Install method
- Manual import
- Extraction
- Extract archive
- Prerequisites
- OpenClaw
- Primary doc
- SKILL.md
Conduct exhaustive multi-source investigation with methodology tracking, source evaluation, and iterative depth.
Conduct exhaustive multi-source investigation with methodology tracking, source evaluation, and iterative depth.
Hand the extracted package to your coding agent with a concrete install brief instead of figuring it out manually.
I downloaded a skill package from Yavira. Read SKILL.md from the extracted folder and install it by following the included instructions. Tell me what you changed and call out any manual steps you could not complete.
I downloaded an updated skill package from Yavira. Read SKILL.md from the extracted folder, compare it with my current installation, and upgrade it while preserving any custom configuration unless the package docs explicitly say otherwise. Summarize what changed and any follow-up checks I should run.
Deep Research = investigate thoroughly until the question is answered. Not surface search โ systematic exploration with documented methodology. Not: quick lookups (โ just search), combining existing docs (โ Synthesize), ongoing monitoring (โ Digest)
Scope โ Search โ Evaluate โ Deepen โ Synthesize โ Document โ Deliver
Before searching, clarify: What exactly needs answering? What depth is required? (Overview / Thorough / Exhaustive) What's the decision this enables? Time/effort budget? Reframe vague questions into specific, answerable queries.
Multi-vector approach (see methodology.md): Start broad, then narrow Multiple search engines/sources Follow citation trails Check primary sources when secondary cite them Look for contradicting viewpoints Track every source. Nothing unattributed.
For each source (see sources.md): Authority: Who wrote this? What credentials? Recency: When? Still valid? Evidence: Claims backed by data? Bias: Any agenda or conflict? Corroboration: Do others confirm this? Flag low-credibility sources. Weight findings accordingly.
Research is iterative: Initial findings reveal new questions Follow promising threads Fill gaps identified Stop when: answer is clear, returns diminish, or budget exhausted Document decision to stop and why.
Merge findings (use Synthesize skill patterns): Reconcile contradictions explicitly Weight by source quality Note confidence levels Identify remaining unknowns
Research trail matters: Sources consulted (with links) Search queries used Why certain sources were weighted higher What was NOT found (gaps)
Format per user needs (see output-formats.md): Executive: BLUF + key findings + confidence Academic: Full methodology + citations Working doc: All findings for further work
๐ฌ DEEP RESEARCH: [Topic] โก ANSWER [Direct answer to the question โ 2-3 sentences] ๐ CONFIDENCE: [High/Medium/Low] โ [why] ๐ KEY FINDINGS โข [Finding 1] โ [source] โข [Finding 2] โ [source] โข [Finding 3] โ [source] โ ๏ธ CAVEATS โข [Important limitation or uncertainty] ๐ณ๏ธ GAPS โข [What couldn't be determined] ๐ SOURCES ([count]) [Numbered list with credibility notes] ๐ METHODOLOGY [Brief: what was searched, how sources were evaluated]
LevelEffortSourcesWhenQuick5-10 min3-5Simple factual questionsStandard30-60 min8-15Most research requestsThorough2-4 hours20-30Important decisionsExhaustiveDays50+Critical, high-stakes Confirm depth before starting. Adjust if findings warrant. References: methodology.md, sources.md, output-formats.md
Code helpers, APIs, CLIs, browser automation, testing, and developer operations.
Largest current source with strong distribution and engagement signals.